How many stem cell trials will it take to get a cure?

When I think about how many clinical trials it will take before a stem cell therapy is available to patients, I’m reminded of the decades old Tootsie Pop commercial where a kid asks a series of talking animals, “How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?”

While Mr. Cow, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Turtle are all stumped, Mr. Owl tackles the question like a true scientist:

“A good question. Let’s find out. [Takes Tootsie pop and starts licking]. A One…A Two-hoo…A Three-hee. [Insert loud crunching sounds] A Three!”

The commercial ends with the narrator concluding that the world may never know how many licks it takes to get to the center (because Mr. Owl failed to complete his experiment…not a true scientist after all).

What do Tootsie Pops have to do with stem cell therapies?

I’m not saying that the Tootsie Pop question holds the same level of importance as the question of when scientists will develop a stem cell therapy that cures a disease, but I find it representative of the confusion and uncertainty that the general public has about when the “promise of stem cell research” will become a reality.

Let me explain…

Mr. Owl claims that it only takes three licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop, but three licks obviously aren’t enough to get through the hard candy exterior to the chewy tootsie center. According to the Tootsie “Scientific Endeavors” page, “at least three detailed scientific studies” determined that it takes between 144-411 licks to get to the center. My intuition is to go with the scientists, but depending on how the experiment was conducted or maybe the size of the tongue used, the final answer could vary.

Embryonic stem cells

Embryonic stem cells

For stem cell clinical trials, the situation is similar. The first clinical trial approved in the U.S. using human embryonic stem cells was in 2009. Since then, hundreds of clinical trials have been conducted globally using pluripotent – either embryonic or induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) – or adult stem cells. But so far, none have made their way routinely to patients outside of a clinical trial setting in the U.S., (although a few stem cell-based products have been approved in other countries), and it’s unclear how many more trials it will take to get to this point.

Part of this murkiness is because we’re still in the early days of stem cell research: human embryonic stem cells were first isolated by James Thomson in 1998, and iPSCs weren’t discovered by Shinya Yamanaka until 2006. Scientists need more time to conduct preclinical research to understand how these stem cells can be best used to treat certain diseases and what stem cells will do when transplanted into patients.

Another other issue is that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has only approved one stem cell therapy – cord blood stem cell transplantation – for commercial use in 2011 and none since then. A big debate is currently ongoing about whether the regulatory landscape needs to change so that stem cell treatments that show promise in trials can get to patients who desperately need them.

Hopefully soon, the FDA will adopt a more efficient strategy for approving stem cell therapies that still keeps patient safety at the forefront. Otherwise it could take a lot longer for newer stem cell technologies like iPSCs to make their way to the clinic (although we’ve seen some encouraging preliminary results using iPSC-based therapy in clinical trials for blindness).

Trial, trial, trial again

So how many clinical trials will it take for a stem cell therapy to succeed sufficiently to gain approval and when will that happen?

Unfortunately, we don’t know the answers to these questions, but we do know that scientists need to continue to develop and test new stem cell treatments in human trials if we want to see any progress.

At CIRM, we are currently funding 16 clinical trials involving stem cell therapies for cancer, heart failure, diabetes, spinal cord injury and other diseases. But we need to fund more trials to increase the odds that some will make it through the gauntlet and prove both safe and effective at treating patients. Our goal now is to fund 50 clinical trials in the next five years. It’s an aggressive plan, but one we feel will hopefully take stem cell therapies from promise to reality.

We also know that CIRM is a soldier in a large army of funding agencies, universities, companies, and scientists around the world battling against time to develop stem cell therapies that could help patients in their lifetimes. And with this stem cell army, we believe we’re getting closer to the chewy center of the Tootsie pop, or in this case, an approved stem cell therapy for patients desperate for a cure.

This blog was written as part of the CCRM Signals iPSC anniversary blog carnival. Please click here to read what other bloggers have to say about the future of stem cells and regenerative medicine.

New approach could help turn back the clock and reverse damage for stroke patients

stroke

Stroke: courtesy WebMD

Stroke is the leading cause of serious, long-term disability in the US. Every year almost 800,000 people suffer from a stroke. The impact on their lives, and the lives of those around them can be devastating.

Right now the only treatment approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is tissue plasminogen activator or tPA. This helps dissolve the blood clot causing most strokes and restores blood flow to the brain. However, to be fully effective this has to be administered within about 3-4 hours after the stroke. Many people are unable to get to the hospital in time and as a result suffer long-term damage, damage that for most people has been permanent.

But now a new study in Nature Medicine shows that might not be the case, and that this damage could even be reversible.

The research, done by a team at the University of Southern California (USC) uses a one-two punch combination of stem cells and a protein that helps those cells turn into neurons, the cells in the brain damaged by a stroke.

First, the researchers induced a stroke in mice and then transplanted human neural stem cells alongside the damaged brain tissue. They then added in a dose of the protein 3K3A-APC or a placebo.

hey found that mice treated with 3K3A-APC had 16 times more human stem-cell derived neurons than the mice treated with the placebo. Those neurons weren’t just sitting around doing nothing. USC’s Berislav Zlokovic, senior author of the paper, says they were actively repairing the stroke-induced damage.

“We showed that 3K3A-APC helps the grafted stem cells convert into neurons and make structural and functional connections with the host’s nervous system. No one in the stroke field has ever shown this, so I believe this is going to be the gold standard for future studies. Functional deficits after five weeks of stroke were minimized, and the mice were almost back to normal in terms of motor and sensorimotor functions. Synapses formed between transplanted cells and host cells, so there is functional activation and cooperation of transplanted cells in the host circuitry.”

The researchers wanted to make sure the transplanted cell-3K3A-ACP combination was really the cause of the improvement in the mice so they then used what’s called an “assassin toxin” to kill the neurons they had created. That reversed the improvements in the treated mice, leaving them comparable to the untreated mice. All this suggests the neurons had become an integral part of the mouse’s brain.

So how might this benefit people? You may remember that earlier this summer Stanford researchers produced a paper showing they had helped some 18 stroke patients, by injecting stem cells from donor bone marrow into their brain. The improvements were significant, including in at least one case regaining the ability to walk. We blogged about that work here

In that study, however, the cells did not become neurons nor did they seem to remain in the brain for an extended period. It’s hoped this new work can build on that by giving researchers an additional tool, the 3K3A-ACP protein, to help the transplanted cells convert to neurons and become integrated into the brain.

One of the other advantages of using this protein is that it has already been approved by the FDA for use in people who have experienced an ischemic stroke, which accounts for about 87 percent of all strokes.

The USC team now hope to get approval from the FDA to see if they can replicate their experiences in mice in people, through a Phase 2 clinical trial.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A look back at the last year – but with our eyes firmly on the future

Randy

CIRM President & CEO Randy Mills doesn’t want “good”, he wants “better”

Better.

With that single word Randy Mills, our President and CEO, starts and ends his letter in our 2015 Annual Report and lays out the simple principle that guides the way we work at CIRM.

Better.

But better what?

“Better infrastructure to translate early stage ideas into groundbreaking clinical trials. Better regulatory practices to advance promising stem cell treatments more efficiently. Better treatments for patients in need.”

“Better” is also the standard everyone at CIRM holds themselves to. Getting better at what we do so we can fulfill our mission of accelerating stem cell treatments to patients with unmet medical needs.

The 2015 Annual Report highlights the achievements of the last year, detailing how we invested $135 million in 47 different projects at all levels of research. How our Board unanimously passed our new Strategic Plan, laying out an ambitious series of goals for the next five years from funding 50 new clinical trials, to creating a new regulatory process for stem cell therapies.

Snapshot of CIRM's 2015 Funding

The report offers a snapshot of where our money has gone this year, and how much we have left. It breaks down what percentage of our funding has gone to different diseases and how much we have spent on administration.

Jonathan Thomas, the Chair of our Board, takes a look back at where we started, 10 years ago, comparing what we did then (16 awards for a total of $12.5 million) to what we are doing today. His conclusion; we’re doing better.

But we still have a long way to go. And we are determined to get even better.

P.S. By the way we are changing the way we do our Annual Report. Our next one will come out on January 1, 2017. We figured it just made sense to take a look back at the last year as soon as the new year begins. It gives you a better (that word again) sense of what we did and where we  are heading. So look out for that, coming sooner than you think.

Dr. Deborah Deas joins CIRM Board

Deborah Deas has been appointed dean of the UCR School of Medicine

Deborah Deas, MD, MPH, UCR School of Medicine

Dr. Deborah Deas is clearly not someone who opts for the quiet life. If she were, she would have stayed home in Adams Run, the tiny town in rural South Carolina where she was born.

The website, NeighborhoodScout.com describes Adams Run (current population 1,492) as:

“One of the quietest neighborhoods in America. When you are here, you will find it to be very quiet. If quiet and peaceful are your cup of tea, you may have found a great place for you.”

Dr. Deas obviously wasn’t a tea drinker because she packed her bags and went off to college in Charleston. That was the first step on a journey that led the self-described “farmer’s daughter” to become an MD, then an MPH (Masters in Public Health), before assuming a leadership role at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). More recently she headed to California’s Inland Empire where she was named the Dean and CEO for Clinical Affairs of the UC Riverside School of Medicine.

And now we are delighted to add to that list of achievements by announcing she is the newest member of the CIRM Board.

She was appointed to the Board by state Treasurer John Chiang who praised her for her:

“Passion to improve  health for underserved populations and to diversify the health care work force. She is committed to making the benefits of advanced medicine available to all Californians.”

 

In a news release our CIRM Board Chair, Jonathan Thomas, was equally fulsome in his praise and welcome to Dr. Deas.

 “We are delighted to have someone with Dr. Deas’ broad experience and expertise join us at CIRM. Her medical background and her commitment to diversity and inclusion are important qualities to bring to a Board that is striving to deliver stem cell treatments to patients, and to reflect the diversity of California.”

To say that she brings a broad array of skills and experience to the Board is something of an understatement. She is board certified in adult psychiatry, child and adolescent psychiatry and addiction psychiatry, and is widely regarded as a national leader in research into youth binge drinking, adolescent nicotine dependence, marijuana use and panic disorder, and pharmaceutical treatment of pediatric depressive disorder.

As if that wasn’t enough, she has also been named as one of the best doctors in the U.S. by U.S. News & World Report for the last eight years.

But the road to UC Riverside and CIRM hasn’t always been easy. In a first person perspective in Psychiatric News.

she said that at MUSC she was just one of two African Americans among the 500 residents in training:

“It was not uncommon for me to be mistaken by many for a social worker, a secretary, or a ward clerk despite wearing my white coat with Deborah Deas, M.D., written on it. This mistake was even made by some of my M.D. peers. I found that the best response was to ask, “And just why do you think I am a social worker?”

She says the lessons she learned from her parents and grandparents helped sustain her:

“They emphasized the importance of setting goals and keeping your eyes on the prize. Service was important, and the ways that one could serve were numerous. The notion that one should learn from others, as well as teach others, was as common as baked bread. My parents instilled in me that education is the key to a fruitful future and that it is something no one can take away from you.”

Her boss at UC Riverside, the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor, Paul D’Anieri said Dr. Deas is a great addition to the CIRM Board:

“Deborah is a public servant at heart. Her own values and goals to help underserved patient populations align with the goals of CIRM to revolutionize medicine and bring new, innovative treatments to all patients who can benefit. I am confident that Dr. Deas’ service will have a lasting positive impact for CIRM and for the people of California.”

Dr. Deas ends her article in Psychiatric News saying:

“The farmer’s daughter has come a long way. I have stood on the shoulders of many, pushing forward with an abiding faith that there was nothing that I could not accomplish.”

She has indeed come a long way. We look forward to being a part of the next stage of her journey, and to her joining CIRM and bringing that “abiding faith” to our work.

 

 

Unlocking the secrets of how stem cells decide what kind of cell they’re going to be

Laszlo Nagy, Ph.D., M.D.

Laszlo Nagy, Ph.D., M.D.: Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Before joining CIRM I thought OCT4 was a date on the calendar. But a new study says it may be a lot closer to a date with destiny, because this study says OCT4 helps determine what kinds of cell a stem cell will become.

Now, before we go any further I should explain for people who have as strong a science background as I do – namely none – that OCT4 is a transcription factor, this is a protein that helps regulate gene activity by turning certain genes on at certain points, and off at others.

The new study, by researches at Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute (SBP), found that OCT4 plays a critical role in priming genes that cause stem cells to differentiate or change into other kinds of cells.

Why is this important? Well, as we search for new ways of treating a wide variety of different diseases we need to find the most efficient and effective way of turning stem cells into the kind of cells we need to regenerate or replace damaged tissue. By understanding the mechanisms that determine how a stem cell differentiates, we can better understand what we need to do in the lab to generate the specific kinds of cells needed to replace those damaged by, say, heart disease or cancer.

The study, published in the journal Molecular Cell, shows how OCT4 works with other transcription factors, sometimes directing a cell to go in one direction, sometimes in another. For example, it collaborates with a vitamin A (aka retinoic acid) receptor (RAR) to convert a stem cell into a neuronal precursor, a kind of early stage brain cell. However, if OCT4 interacts with another transcription factor called beta-catenin then the stem cell goes in another regulatory direction altogether.

In an interview with PhysOrg News, senior author Laszlo Nagy said this finding could help develop more effective methods for producing specific cell types to be used in therapies:

“Our findings suggest a general principle for how the same differentiation signal induces distinct transitions in various types of cells. Whereas in stem cells, OCT4 recruits the RAR to neuronal genes, in bone marrow cells, another transcription factor would recruit RAR to genes for the granulocyte program. Which factors determine the effects of differentiation signals in bone marrow cells – and other cell types – remains to be determined.”

In a way it’s like programming all the different devices that are attached to your TV at home. If you hit a certain combination of buttons you get to one set of stations, hit another combination and you get to Netflix. Same basic set up, but completely different destinations.

“In a sense, we’ve found the code for stem cells that links the input—signals like vitamin A and Wnt—to the output—cell type. Now we plan to explore whether other transcription factors behave similarly to OCT4—that is, to find the code in more mature cell types.”

 

 

How the Ice Bucket Challenge changed the fight against ALS

Ice Bucket2

200 people in Boston take the Ice Bucket Challenge: Photo courtesy Forbes

A couple of years ago millions of people did something they probably never thought they would: they dumped a bucket of ice cold water on their head to raise awareness about a disease most of them had probably never heard of, and almost certainly knew very little about.

The disease was ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, and the Ice Bucket Challenge was something that went from a fun idea by a supporter of the ALS Association, to a blockbuster $220 million fundraiser. Like any good idea it sparked a backlash with critics accusing it of being a lazy way for people to feel good without actually doing anything, of diverting money from other charities, and even of just wasting water at a time of drought (at least here in California.)

But two years later we can now look back and see if those critics were correct, and if the money raised did make a difference. And the answer, I’m happy to say, is no and yes. In that order.

An article in the New Yorker magazine, by James Surowiecki, takes a look at what has happened since the Ice Bucket Challenge exploded on the scene and it has some good news:

  • Contributions to the ALS Association remain higher than before the Challenge
  • The average age of donors dropped from 50+ to 35
  • The Challenge may have helped spur an increase in overall donations to charity

All this is, of course, excellent news. But there’s an even more important point, which is that the money raised by the Challenge has helped advance ALS research further and faster than ever before.

Barbara Newhouse, the CEO of the ALS Association told Surowiecki:

“The research environment is dramatically different from what it was. We’re seeing research that’s really moving the needle not just on the causes of the disease but also on treatments and therapies.”

As an example Newhouse cites a study, published in Science  last summer, by researchers at Johns Hopkins that helped explain protein clumps found in the brains of people with ALS. Philip Wong, one of the lead authors of the study, says money raised by the Challenge helped make their work possible;

“Without it, we wouldn’t have been able to come out with the studies as quickly as we did. The funding from the ice bucket is just a component of the whole—in part, it facilitated our effort.”

And just this week the ALS Association said funding from the Challenge helped identify a gene connected to the disease.

Having been one of those who took a dunk for science – and we did ours early on, when the Challenge had only raised $4m – it’s nice to know something as silly and simple can have such a profound impact on developing treatments for a deadly disorder.

 

 

Out of the mouths, or in this case hearts, of babes comes a hopeful therapy for heart attack patients

Pediatric-Congenital-Heart-Disease-patient-300x200

Lessons learned from babies with heart failure could now help adults

Inspiration can sometimes come from the most unexpected of places. For English researcher Stephen Westaby it came from seeing babies who had heart attacks bounce back and recover. It led Westaby to a new line of research that could offer hope to people who have had a heart attack.

Westaby, a researcher at the John Radcliffe hospital in Oxford, England, found that implanting a novel kind of stem cell in the hearts of people undergoing surgery following a heart attack had a surprisingly significant impact on their recovery.

Westaby got his inspiration from studies showing babies who had a heart attack and experienced scarring on their heart, were able to bounce back and, by the time they reached adolescence, had no scarring. He wondered if it was because the babies’ own heart stem cells were able to repair the damage.

Scarring is a common side effect of a heart attack and affects the ability of the heart to be able to pump blood efficiently around the body. As a result of that diminished pumping ability people have less energy, and are at increased risk of further heart problems. For years it was believed this scarring was irreversible. This study, published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research, suggests it may not be.

Westaby and his team implanted what they describe as a “novel mesenchymal precursor (iMP)” type of stem cell in the hearts of patients who were undergoing heart bypass surgery following a heart attack. The cells were placed in parts of the heart that showed sizeable scarring and poor blood flow.

Two years later the patients showed a 30 percent improvement in heart function, a 40 percent reduction in scar size, and a 70 percent improvement in quality of life.

In an interview with the UK Guardian newspaper, Westaby admitted he was not expecting such a clear cut benefit:

“Quite frankly it was a big surprise to find the area of scar in the damaged heart got smaller,”

Of course it has to be noted that the trial was small, only involving 11 patients. Nonetheless the findings are important and impressive. Westaby and his team now hope to do a much larger study.

CIRM is funding a clinical trial with Capricor that is taking a similar approach, using stem cells to rejuvenate the hearts of patients who have had heart attacks.

Fred Lesikar, one of the patient’s in the first phase of that trial, experienced a similar benefit to those in the English trial and told us about it in our Stories of Hope.

CIRM Board targets diabetes and kidney disease with big stem cell research awards

diabetes2

A recent study  estimated there may be more than 500 million people worldwide who have diabetes. That’s an astounding figure and makes diabetes one of the largest chronic disease epidemics in human history.

One of the most serious consequences of untreated or uncontrolled diabetes is kidney damage. That can lead to fatigue, weakness, confusion, kidney failure and even death. So two decisions taken by the CIRM Board today were good news for anyone already suffering from either diabetes or kidney disease. Or both.

The Board awarded almost $10 million to Humacyte to run a Phase 3 clinical trial of an artificial vein needed by people undergoing hemodialysis – that’s the most common form of dialysis for people with kidney damage. Hemodialysis helps clean out impurities and toxins from the blood. Without it waste will build up in the kidneys with devastating consequences.

The artificial vein is a kind of bioengineered blood vessel. It is implanted in the individual’s arm and, during dialysis, is connected to a machine to move the blood out of the body, through a filter, and then back into the body. The current synthetic version of the vein is effective but is prone to clotting and infections, and has to be removed regularly. All this puts the patient at risk.

Humacyte’s version – called a human acellular vessel or HAV – uses human cells from donated aortas that are then seeded onto a biodegradable scaffold and grown in the lab to form the artificial vein. When fully developed the structure is then “washed” to remove all the cellular tissue, leaving just a collagen tube. That is then implanted in the patient, and their own stem cells grow onto it, essentially turning it into their own tissue.

In earlier studies Humacyte’s HAV was shown to be safer and last longer than current versions. As our President and CEO, Randy Mills, said in a news release, that’s clearly good news for patients:

“This approach has the potential to dramatically improve our ability to care for people with kidney disease. Being able to reduce infections and clotting, and increase the quality of care the hemodialysis patients get could have a significant impact on not just the quality of their life but also the length of it.”

There are currently almost half a million Americans with kidney disease who are on dialysis. Having something that makes life easier, and hopefully safer, for them is a big plus.

The Humacyte trial is looking to enroll around 350 patients at three sites in California; Sacramento, Long Beach and Irvine.

While not all people with diabetes are on dialysis, they all need help maintaining healthy blood sugar levels, particularly people with type 1 diabetes. That’s where the $3.9 million awarded to ViaCyte comes in.

We’re already funding a clinical trial with ViaCyte  using an implantable delivery system containing stem cell-derived cells that is designed to measure blood flow, detect when blood sugar is low, then secrete insulin to restore it to a healthy level.

This new program uses a similar device, called a PEC-Direct. Unlike the current clinical trial version, the PEC-Direct allows the patient’s blood vessels to directly connect, or vasularize, with the cells inside it. ViaCyte believes this will allow for a more robust engraftment of the stem cell-derived cells inside it and that those cells will be better able to produce the insulin the body needs.

Because it allows direct vascularization it means that people who get the delivery system  will also need to get chronic immune suppression to stop their body’s immune system attacking it. For that reason it will be used to treat patients with type 1 diabetes that are at high risk for acute complications such as severe hypoglycemic (low blood sugar) events associated with hypoglycemia unawareness syndrome.

In a news release Paul Laikind, Ph.D., President and CEO of ViaCyte, said this approach could help patients most at risk.

“This high-risk patient population is the same population that would be eligible for cadaver islet transplants, a procedure that can be highly effective but suffers from a severe lack of donor material. We believe PEC-Direct could overcome the limitations of islet transplant by providing an unlimited supply of cells, manufactured under cGMP conditions, and a safer, more optimal route of administration.”

The Board also approved more than $13.6 million in awards under our Discovery program. You can see the winners here.

 

Stem cell transplant offers Jake a glimpse of hope

Jake

Jake Javier surrounded by friends; Photo courtesy Julie Haener KTVU

On Thursday, July 7th, Jake Javier became the latest member of a very select group. Jake underwent a stem cell transplant for a spinal cord injury at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center here in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The therapy is part of the CIRM-funded clinical trial run by Asterias Biotherapeutics. For Asterias it meant it had hit a significant milestone (more on that later). But for Jake, it was something far more important. It was the start of a whole new phase in his life.

Jake seriously injured his spinal cord in a freak accident after diving into a swimming pool just one day before he was due to graduate from San Ramon Valley high school. Thanks, in part, to the efforts of the tireless patient advocate and stem cell champion Roman Reed, Jake was able to enroll in the Asterias trial.

astopc1The goal of the trial is to test the safety of transplanting three escalating doses of AST-OPC1 cells. These are a form of cell called oligodendrocyte progenitors, which are capable of becoming several different kinds of brain cells, some of which play a supporting role and help protect nerve cells in the central nervous system – the area damaged in spinal cord injury.

To be eligible, individuals have to have experienced a severe neck injury in the last 30 days, one that has left them with no sensation or movement below the level of their injury, and that means they have typically lost all lower limb function and most hand and arm function.

The first group of three patients was completed in August of last year. This group was primarily to test for safety, to make sure this approach was not going to cause any harm to patients. That’s why the individuals enrolled were given the relatively small dose of 2 million cells. So far none of the patients have experienced any serious side effects, and some have even shown some small improvements.

In contrast, the group Jake is in were given 10 million cells each. Jake was the fifth person treated in this group. That means Asterias can now start assessing the safety data from this group and, if there are no problems, can plan on enrolling people for group 3 in about two months. That group of patients will get 20 million cells.

It’s these two groups, Jakes and group 3, that are getting enough cells that it’s hoped they will see some therapeutic benefits.

In a news release, Steve Cartt, President and CEO of Asterias, said they are encouraged by the progress of the trial so far:

“Successful completion of enrollment and dosing of our first efficacy cohort receiving 10 million cells in our ongoing Phase 1/2a clinical study represents a critically important milestone in our AST-OPC1 clinical program for patients with complete cervical spinal cord injuries. In addition, while it is still very early in the development process and the patient numbers are quite small, we are encouraged by the upper extremity motor function improvements we have observed so far in patients previously enrolled and dosed in the very low dose two million cell cohort that had been designed purely to evaluate safety.”

 

jake and familyJake and his family are well aware that this treatment is not going to be a cure, that he won’t suddenly get up and walk again. But it could help him in other, important ways, such as possibly getting back some ability to move his hands.

The latest news is that Jake is doing well, that he experienced some minor problems after the surgery but is bouncing back and is in good spirits.

Jake’s mother Isabelle said this has been an overwhelming experience for the family, but they are getting through it thanks to the love and support of everyone who hears Jake’s story. She told CIRM:

 “We are all beyond thrilled to have an opportunity of this magnitude. Just the thought of Jake potentially getting the use of his hands back gives him massive hope. Jake has a strong desire to recover to the highest possible level. He is focused and dedicated to this process. You have done well to choose him for your research. He will make you proud.”

He already has.

Jake and Brady gear

New England Patriots star quarterback Tom Brady signed a ball and jersey for Jake after hearing about the accident


Related Links:

The Spanish Inquisition and a tale of two stem cell agencies

Monty

Monty Python’s Spanish Inquisition sketch: Photo courtesy Daily Mail UK

It’s not often an article on stem cell research brings the old, but still much loved, British comedy series Monty Python into the discussion but a new study in the journal Cell Stem Cell does just that, comparing the impact of CIRM and the UK’s Regenerative Medicine Platform (UKRMP).

The article, written by Fiona Watt of King’s College London and Stanford’s Irv Weissman (a CIRM grantee – you can see his impressive research record here) looks at CIRM and UKRMP’s success in translating stem cell research into clinical applications in people.

It begins by saying that in research, as in real estate, location is key:

“One thing that is heavily influenced by location, however, is our source of funding. This in turn depends on the political climate of the country in which we work, as exemplified by research on stem cells.”

And, as Weissman and Watt note, political climate can have a big impact on that funding. CIRM was created by the voters of California in 2004, largely in response to President George W. Bush’s restrictions on the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research. UKRMP, in contrast was created by the UK government in 2013 and designed to help strengthen the UK’s translational research sector. CIRM was given $3 billion to do its work. UKRMP has approximately $38 million.

Inevitably the two agencies took very different approaches to funding, shaped in part by the circumstances of their birth – one as a largely independent state agency, the other created as a tool of national government.

CIRM, by virtue of its much larger funding was able to create world-class research facilities, attract top scientists to California and train a whole new generation of scientists. It has also been able to help some of the most promising projects get into clinical trials. UKRMP has used its more limited funding to create research hubs, focusing on areas such as cell behavior, differentiation and manufacturing, and safety and effectiveness. Those hubs are encouraged to work collaboratively, sharing their expertise and best practices.

Weissman and Watt touch on the problems both agencies ran into, including the difficulty of moving even the best research out of the lab and into clinical trials:

“Although CIRM has moved over 20 projects into clinical trials most are a long way from becoming standard therapies. This is not unexpected, as the interval between discovery and FDA approved therapeutic via clinical trials is in excess of 10 years minimum.”

 

And here is where Monty Python enters the picture. The authors quote one of the most famous lines from the series: “Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition – because our chief weapon is surprise.”

They use that to highlight the surprises and uncertainty that stem cell research has gone through in the more than ten years since CIRM was created. They point out that a whole category of cells, induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells, didn’t exist until 2006; and that few would have predicted the use of gene/stem cell therapy combinations. The recent development of the CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing technology shows the field is progressing at a rate and in directions that are hard to predict; a reminder that that researchers and funding agencies should continue to expect the unexpected.

With two such different agencies the authors wisely resist the temptation to make any direct comparisons as to their success but instead conclude:

“…both CIRM and UKRMP have similar goals but different routes (and funding) to achieving them. Connecting people to work together to move regenerative medicine into the clinic is an over-arching objective and one that, we hope, will benefit patients regardless of where they live.”